Max

Barrs Court Rd, pretty much all of Whitecross Rd, Three Elms Road, Chandos Street to name a few. Some pot holes but mostly just a rough uneven surface that is awful to drive on and even worse to cycle on. I cycled up Whitecross the other day and almost decided to become part of the problem, not the solution by purchasing a big diesel guzzling 4x4. I've heard choose how you move and promotion of cycling but I'd invite any person responsible for environment and place to actually get out on a bike (bone shaker) and see what all the fuss is about.

The seven principles of public office. SELFLESSNESS Holders of public office should act solely in terms of the public interest. INTEGRITY Holders of public office must avoid placing themselves under any obligation to people or organisations that might try inappropriately to influence them in their work. They should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family, or their friends. They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships. OBJECTIVITY Holders of public office must act and take decisions impartially, fairly and on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias. ACCOUNTABILITY Holders of public office are accountable to the public for their decisions and actions and must submit themselves to the scrutiny necessary to ensure this. OPENNESS Holders of public office should act and take decisions in an open and transparent manner. Information should not be withheld from the public unless there are clear and lawful reasons for so doing. HONESTY Holders of public office should be truthful. LEADERSHIP Holders of public office should exhibit these principles in their own behaviour. They should actively promote and robustly support the principles and be willing to challenge poor behaviour wherever it occurs. https://www.theguardian.com/government-computing-network/2011/oct/19/local-government-transparency-publishing-information https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/454191/Managing_Public_Money_AA_v2_-jan15.pdf It would appear that Council management would benefit from receiving training on how to manage the business of public office with regards to openness, transparency and honesty. Council execs command an attractive salary for what they do however I feel that if I were to employ them within my business, it wouldn't be long before I started seeing a dip in performance. I wouldn't be getting value for money from my management team. Taking time to read the two links above will make you begin to realise that the Council are not working to best practice and therefore leave themselves wide open to criticism. It's a shame this site wasn't more widely read by the public as I feel the more people that know what goes on will create a louder voice demanding openness and transparency. Maybe I'll share the info on other social media pages. Judging by previous comments, questions are being asked and answers sought therefore the only way to be heard is to shout loud.

Sorry Mr Chappell, I've obviously touched a raw nerve. 😀 I'm not quite sure what a respectable vandal is. Are you stating that vandals wait around or hide up until the Police leave before targeting play equipment? I find it quite worrying that people would be so strategic in targeting high value play areas in this way. I'm with Slim in that Council tax has risen and let's be honest will rise again in 2017. The Council wastes a lot of money on silly projects or pie in the sky ideas. I believe that if there is money to procure and instal signage at Plough Lane offices directing smokers to the smoking area, because staff can't be tidy, then there is money for more worthwhile causes. I have no beef with the Council I just think that the ship needs sorting in better order. Going back to touching a raw nerve. You are a Councillor and as such will receive much debate and criticism on many issues. One would expect better responses than the childish comments offered, perhaps instead offering a viable explanation for poor condition of the equipment and the lack of attention given to it. Then as Councillor responsible and one who is elected to sort out problems, offering to try and sort it out if you can. I appreciate your job may be difficult at times and you may not always have a solution but you could try, rather than be annoyed because the problem has been highlighted.

The Council can't afford to pay for recreational items in designated areas for parents and children to enjoy herefords open spaces. They are still recouping the costs of all the financial co@£ups we read about, money to the guy for his team to audit him and the 'has it or hasn't it???' missing millions. I see a new guy has been recruited to post in charge of finance let's hope he doesn't dabble in any accountancy wizardry trickery and make off with any tax payers money. It'll be a oh no he didn't, oh yes he did, typical pantomime fiasco trying to sort it out followed by a closed doors secret handshake tribunal. But in all seriousness, no Police or CSO's any more to visit areas and stop the vandalism/bored partying teenagers, thin blue line getting thinner. No Special Constables to patrol and deter vandalism/make people walking the parks feel safe etc. Doesn't anyone want to volunteer, has the public lost all faith in Policing nowadays? No Community Protection, littering/dog fouling staff in the Council anymore?? Only people I see in high viz looking more like CSO's are Civil Enforcement Officers. Saw a CEO lady the other day helping an old lady who had fallen, not a cso in sight. Balfour Batty managers sitting in the ivory tower wondering how they can get away without doing any jobs or contracting work out to odd jobbers for peanuts, whilst figuring out how long they can keep the gravy chain going with their fat salaries, until Herefordshire Council decide that they really are crap and put the contracts out to tender. Don't the council employ contracts monitoring managers to check performance?? 17 months and no repairs, not much performance management going on there. Absolutely disgraceful really and someone's getting paid to manage all of this.

Animal rights at Hereford store. The blonde in the picture winning the vouchers is from Worcester. She's a model and PR girl hired by stores to turn up and look glam, funny how she won. Just lucky I guess.

I can see the criterion to not resubmit to committee, but I still can't understand why the initial application was declined. On what grounds, reasons etc to refuse permission to build. As a criterion Marc Willimont obviously doesn't consider disability to be an important factor. I'm trying to understand reasons for refusal, could it be that there is a boundary line running through the property or are the council concerned about the trend and associated effects of 'land grabbing', or are they concerned that the family could possibly apply for a 'disability facilities grant' if planning is approved?

I usually like to form my opinion having heard the facts from both sides however based on the information given in this topic I can say that's it's absolutely shocking. No mention of objection, only support for the application and a good case put forward i.e. Aiding a disability surely should warrant approval? Is it that the Council are such a corporate money making machine that they would make this family suffer, forcing them to resubmit another planning application (with the associated fee attached) in order to boost funds? Every department (perhaps with the exception of adult social care) is under pressure to perform, reduce spend, justify staff on payroll and increase revenue, therefore it wouldn't be a shock to discover that the true reasons for the endless cases of planning objections with no common sense reasons are purely to facilitate more money from people resubmitting planning applications. There is a money pie (budget) and certain people,businesses want a slice of it. There are people that control who gets a slice of the pie and want to be paid massive amounts of cash to be in charge for deciding who gets a chunk, arguably too many people all draining off some of the pie contents. There are also those who come on board with their own agenda, chipping away at the pastry and exercising some control over the pie servers. These types can obtain massive chunks of pie secretly by ensuring that those who want pie get it as long as some of it comes their way. Anyway I lost where I was going with this, you can form your own opinion why the application was rejected. I hope the council see sense and the family get their application approved enabling the young lady to live an easier life. Perhaps they can refund the application fee for the inconvenience caused. Perhaps someone from the council can offer the other side of the story, with good, reasonable, common sense grounds for objection??